MY GROUP WHICH CONSISTS OF VALERIE, EMILY, AND JERALD ARE WORKING ON CENSORSHIP IN CHINA.
(p.s: why hasn't anyone posted on the blog? am i supposed to do this :X )
Valerie's:
http://websearch.about.com/od/focusongoogle/a/googlechina.htm
Right now (February 2005), Google is complying with China's in-country laws, and searchers in China can use Google to search the Web; albeit a censored one. Google is actually choosing to censor itself in accordance with a constantly updated list of unacceptable terms to the Chinese government. So, on one hand, you could argue that Google is making at least some information available to searchers in China, and is establishing a presence there when and if China decides to improve its policies.
Google had a choice: to disappear entirely from China and miss out on an enormous search market, or comply at least temporarily with China's censorship demands. They didn't HAVE to be in China, they chose to be in China, and one could argue that it's because of money.
Bottom line is this: Google chose to comply with a sovereign country's rules and regulations. Google decided that it was willing to pay the price China was asking to get into a vastly untapped search market,and unfortunately that price included censorship.
Issue:
Censorship in China, though initiated by the government, can only be implemented with the compliance of the media.
Analysis:
Google and other forms of the media do not entirely conform to their mottos and principles because they are profit-minded and would not want to lose an opportunity to earn money. Therefore, as seen in the case of Google as part of the censorship in China, we can see that companies that are profit driven would readily agree to the terms and conditions of the government to survive in this competitive market. However, when these companies chose to censor in compliance with the terms of the government, they are depriving the public of their right to know and access to certain information.
Assumption:
It is assumed that all companies are profit-driven and will definitely work with the government to censor “unwanted” information so as to deceive the people. However, this may not be true a as there may be firms that are willing to abider by their rules and principles.
*
Emily's:
Link:
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=98784
Issue : The attempt to cover up the reported news of Melamine.
"Actually, our reporter He Feng had received the information at the end of July that more than 20 babies were hospitalized for kidney stones in Tongji Hospital, Wuhan city, Hubei province as a result of consuming the tainted Sanlu milk powder. But for reasons that everybody knows, we were not able to investigate the case at that time because harmony was needed everywhere. As a news editor, I was deeply concerned because I sensed that this was going to be a huge public health catastrophe. But I could not send any reporters to investigate."
Points Of Views:
POV1: The people who knew about the existence of melamine cannot intervene in fear of offending those who hold higher positions.
--“But I could not send any reporters to investigate."
This shows that those with those with little authority cannot make decisions to correct things because their findings might stir up a storm that they will not be able to answer to the superiors and in fear of getting the company into trouble with the government.
However, they are assuming that no one will let the cat out of the bag and uphold justice.
POV2: People are stopping the truth from being known to the public to protect their own interests.
-- “The Chinese government has tried to contain the fallout from the melamine scandal by blaming lower-level government officials, saying they did not report to the central government in Beijing. However, this is far from convincing.”
This shows that the government might also be aware of the case of melamine but they are trying to cover-up to protect the country’s interest. However, they are inflicting even more damage to the country’s reputation and resulted in even more unhappiness among people.
In this case, the government is assuming that people are ignorant and it’s for the good of all Chinese.
*
Jerald's:
Article: The Internet censorship in
Issue: Joint censorship between Chinese government & foreign corporations relating to the Internet in
Amnesty cited several foreign companies - Cisco Systems, Microsoft, Nortel Networks, Websense and Sun Microsystems - which had reportedly provided technology used to censor and control the use of the Internet in
The report focuses on Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google's cooperation with the Chinese government's censorship of search engines and email, web and blog content.
Link: http://www.amnestyusa.org/business-and-human-rights/internet-censorship/page.do?id=1101572
POV1: The Chinese government censored the Internet by collaborating with foreign networks.
Analysis: This shows that the Chinese government did not want their citizens to gain access to the Internet in fear of rebellion. The Internet may expose negative things about
Assumption: This is based on an assumption that the citizens are not aware of
POV2: Foreign companies are profit-driven.
Analysis: This shows that foreign companies do not care about whether if their search engines are censored or not, they just want to make money and in this case, they worked hand in hand with the Chinese government.
*
Wanzhen's:
1) GOOGLE CENSORS ITSELF FOR CHINA
SOURCE: BBC NEWS
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4645596.stm
Leading internet company Google has said it will censor its search services in China in order to gain greater access to China's fast-growing market.
Google has offered a Chinese-language version of its search engine for years but users have been frustrated by government blocks on the site. The company is setting up a new site - Google.cn - which it will censor itself to satisfy the authorities in Beijing. Google argued it would be more damaging to pull out of China altogether.
Google's move in China comes less than a week after it resisted efforts by the US Department of Justice to make it disclose data on what people were searching for. Its e-mail, chat room and blogging services will not be available because of concerns the government could demand users' personal information. Google said it planned to notify users when access had been restricted on certain search terms.
The company argues it can play a more useful role in China by participating than by boycotting it, despite the compromises involved.
"While removing search results is inconsistent with Google's mission, providing no information (or a heavily degraded user experience that amounts to no information) is more inconsistent with our mission," a statement said.
Julian Pain, internet spokesman for campaign group Reporters Without Borders, said Google's decision to "collaborate" with the Chinese government was "a real shame".
Issue:
Google moving into the China market by setting up a new Chinese version of the website – Google.cn, and concerns over the censorship it has introduced, restricting access/information to certain information and data.
Point of view:
I feel that Google is right (financially) to enter China and create the Google.cn website for the Chinese, to provide information and function as a normal Chinese-based search engine. However, I must criticize that they have censored information and restricted access to ‘thousands of sensitive terms and web sites’ to ‘satisfy the authorities in Beijing’. Personally, I think that this is simply forbidding the people to find out about any sensitive issues or topics (independence of Taiwan, 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, etc) Yes, China is a large country that Google can earn huge amounts of money from, but to me, it is kind of unethical for them to remove search results. And I do not see how the company can ‘play a more useful role in China by participating than by boycotting it’. In my opinion, I think that the movement of Google into China is not only ‘a real shame’; it also goes to show how ‘money-minded’ the world can be.
2) Censorship in China
SOURCE:
http://www.rsf.org/IMG/pdf/Voyage_au_coeur_de_la_censure_GB.pdf
Jiao Guobiao discusses how the flow of information is constricted
There are three or four major aspects of media control/censorship in mainland China. The first, and the most important, is the effort to isolate China from the outside world. To accomplish this, China makes it difficult for overseas journalists to gain access to the country for interviews. Even when they do acquire permission from the Chinese government, their freedom is highly circumscribed.
Another method of media control is to interfere with and disturb the reception of international radio services, for example Voice of America and BBC. In cities, the interference is especially strong. There are also serious restrictions on international satellite services. Only hotels with a three star or higher ranking are permitted to receive such signals. Generally, with the exception of government officials of a certain ranking, the general public is kept from receiving such services.
China’s isolation from the outside world has been a long tradition, which ultimately implanted a sense of fear in the general public when dealing with interviews from overseas media. From personal experience, I can say that I have been advised and requested many times to decline interviews with overseas journalists.
Each article goes through three or four stages of supervision in order to reach publication: (1) the editor; (2) the branch director in charge of the editor’s work; (3) the editor-in-chief of the agency; and (4) the umbrella company over this agency (if there is one). In contrast to the rigid system of China, I interviewed a New York Times reporter on international affairs about their system and he told me that the final decision on publication was entirely up to him. In China, as an article makes its way up the ladder, the content becomes more politically conscious and less politically sensitive.
There is also a system of punishment for media agencies that were responsible for the publication of sensitive issues.
Issue:
China tries hard to isolate itself from other countries (and how) and also always censors large amounts of information that is provided to the Chinese through the different forms of media.
Point of View:
I am revolted by how the Chinese government tries so hard to keep the Chinese citizens from knowing certain information, or researching on certain topics that may cause controversies or negative feelings towards any group of people, or government authorities. My perspective is that people have rights, and especially the right to know. The massive amount of serious censorship in China has restricted people’s right to learn about things they want to know more about. On the other hand, one thing I don’t really understand is why the Chinese want to isolate themselves, is it to create a mere sense of an ‘independent country’? Why are they ‘protecting’ information about sensitive topics? Are they afraid of uproars that may come from the Chinese citizens? Even having a punishment system for media agencies if they publish ‘inappropriate’ materials? I have no idea why, but I am not for the idea of restricting access to this very big amount of information. It might be safe and helpful (to the authorities) to a certain extent, but it is definitely unethical.
*
TATA Guys! See Y'all tomorrow :)
No comments:
Post a Comment